Agenda and minutes

(Head of Research and Democratic Services) To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

None.

(Head of Research and Democratic Services). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor M Cohen declared a general personal interest by virtue of being Criminal Defence Solicitor. He declared that his interest was not prejudicial and he would remain in the meeting.

Attached to this agenda is a copy of the proposals presented to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, which led to the setting up of this Panel.  However, Members now need to determine the scope of the study and produce a set of Terms of Reference, which reflect those objectives for approval by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. To this end a Task and Finish Planning Form is attached.

In order to help the Panel, a set of ‘Notes for Guidance’ for the operating of a Task and Finish Panel is also attached. This sets out how a Task and Finish Panel should ideally go about scoping its programme of work, gathering information and evidence and finally reporting back to the main Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the larger Council. A draft layout for a final report is also attached. Please note that these are still in draft and may alter over the next few weeks, until endorsed by the July Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting.

The meeting debated the issues involved in reviewing the partnership provisions of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. It was noted that the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) was to be made up of statutory authorities, including the District Council, the Primary Care Trust, the local Police Authority and the Fire Brigade. Currently consultation meetings are under way and the meeting will get feed back from these meetings by officers.

The review of the Crime and Disorder Act indicated that there would be an increased role for Scrutiny with a form of  ‘Scrutiny Plus’ – involving the partner agencies to better reflect the multi-agency nature of community safety work. The meeting noted that the CDRP is organised into strata, at the top layer being a Strategy Panel made up of senior officers, with member level participation. Below this is a Co-ordinating Group and below that are about seven Crime Action Groups targeting specific areas of crime. There are also sub-groups called ‘Problem Solving Groups’ that look at crime hot-spots.

The Panel agreed that they would like to:

a)      interview the Police and establish areas where they can help and what are the real crime figures and the reasons for it;

b)      talk to the Probation Service – about restorative justice amongst other things;

c)      talk to the PCT about mental health and criminality;

d)      talk to Transport for London about crime in the South of the district, is it caused by people coming from the Metropolitan area via bus or tube;

e)      find out about the provision of Youth Services by talking to someone from ‘The Box’ in Epping.

The panel would also need to consider the proposal of a “Community Call for Action” as outlined in the draft. Examples need to be put to the Police to ask them what they would do if they got a community call for action.

The Panel would like to develop Neighbourhood Management Teams (NMT) that would consist of local people, the beat policeman, the ward councillor(s) and a Parish or Town clerk or representative. This would be the first port of call for people with problems, if could not solve it then they could refer it up to the CDRP. The NMT would act as a filter system.

The Panel also agreed to consider the following:

·         Last year Cabinet Members agreed to support a joint Police / Council Community Safety Team – based within the District Council Offices. Since that time, due to difficulties around office space, the project has been slow to progress. Is suitable space able to be found in order to house such a team?

·         Secondly, if a joint team does not come to fruitition, it is vital that the Council’s Crime Reduction Team are moved to suitable accommodation where the risk of sensitive data, and the day to day activities of the team can be conducted in a more secure environment.

·         Graffiti is costing the Council more and more each year. It would be far more cost  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Having agreed the scope of the study and aims and objectives that the Panel hopes to achieve, it is necessary to agree a work programme to achieve the outcomes. A draft timetable should also be agreed.

A review of the partnership provisions of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (CDA) was carried out by the Home Office, the Local Government Association (LGA), the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the Association of Police Authorities (APA) between November 2004 and January 2005. Over 450 key stakeholders and practitioners attended four regional seminars held towards the end of 2004, and many more contributed through e-questionnaires and submissions. Representatives of key central Government departments were also involved. A report of the review's findings is attached.

The Government’s overall objective in carrying out the review was to strengthen the visibility, responsiveness, membership and role of local partnerships. The aim is to make them the most effective possible vehicle for tackling crime, anti-social behaviour, behaviour adversely affecting the environment and substance misuse at a local level.

Also attached is a document taken off the Crime Reduction Government website which answers the some of the more frequently asked questions and acts as a good background document to the Crime and Disorder Act Review.

Outcomes and Timescale

The Panel needs to give consideration to the outcomes it would like to achieve and identify probable end dates for the conclusion of the evidence gathering stage, the evaluation stage and the final report writing stage.

The Panel agreed that:

• The next meeting of the panel would be set aside to question the Police, where using the National Intelligence Model they would hope to pinpoint areas causing concerns;
• A meeting should be devoted to the PCT with a view to questioning about the link between mental health and crime;
• A joint meeting should be held with the Probation Service and the Fire Brigade and Transport for London;
• A separate meeting should also be devoted to EFDC specialist officers such as the Anti Social Behaviour Officer and the officer responsible for CCTV coverage and the Youth Services Officer.

Following these meeting the Panel will need to collate the information gathered and relate it to the CDRP and how EFDC could help improve on it.

The Panel agreed that:

• All panel meeting will start at 7pm with a half hour briefing session to plan the questions to be asked. The question session with the invited organization to begin at 7:30pm;
• Question sessions to last up to 9pm and then an officer/members ‘post meeting’ session to take place;
• A time limit of six months for the duration of the Task and Finish Panel to be set with a final report to be written and agreed by end of December 2006 or beginning January 2007.

Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs 6 and 25 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution require that the permission of the Chairman be obtained, after prior notice to the Chief Executive, before urgent business not specified in the agenda (including a supplementary agenda of which the statutory period of notice has been given) may be transacted.

In accordance with Operational Standing Order 6 (non-executive bodies), any item raised by a non-member shall require the support of a member of the Committee concerned and the Chairman of that Committee. Two weeks’ notice of non-urgent items is required.

None raised.

To be agreed.

Next meeting set for Tuesday, 1 August 2006 starting at 7pm. Representatives from the Police to be invited to this meeting.